Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Kinley This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

shakercoola With a budget in the region of £149m in today's money, Battle of Britain was a huge production with a galaxy of international stars. The aerial sequences are riveting, the action compelling. There isn't a great deal of character development and it is flat in parts, and the score is platitudinous, but this is a copper-bottom action film and Guy Hamilton was an accomplished technician and the man to turn to in this genre in the early 1970s. There's no getting away from the telling of events as they occurred and they had to honour the real pilots and ground staff who gave their lives to the cause, so it's laden with acton. The film is generally faithful to real events and it has a relatively upbeat tone given the subject matter which I suppose helps due to its 2hs 13mins length. No epic retellings should be of shorter duration. I'd avoided watching the film for years, probably because of what I 'd perceived as a grainy film stock but recent releases improve the quality and even so, I now think the dated feel adds to the spectacle.

bowmanblue 'The Battle of Britain' is, unsurprisingly, about the period during the Second World War before the Americans joined and Britain was generally under air siege from the Nazis. I'll say now that I thoroughly enjoyed the film and was surprised at some of the negativity towards it. From what I can gather, people believe that the film isn't 'historically accurate,' as it doesn't give enough mention to all the other (primarily Commonwealth) countries' pilots who also lost their lives in the fight.To be fair, they may have a point. Yes, the film *almost* makes it look like only British pilots fought (with the odd fleeting scene with a handful of Polish airmen). But, in order to do every nation justice, the film would have to last weeks in order to give every airman enough screen time.During the end credits, we're treated to a poignant text reminded of the 'official' statistics, showing just how many other nationalities helped Britain out (and it's probably more than you think!). However, if you really want to get the most out of this film, you'll just have to accept that it's the Brits who the story really focuses on.And there are some pretty big names on the bill. No one bigger than Michael Caine, Robert Shaw and Edward Fox to name but a few. Others are there largely to be cameos, but everyone plays their part.It's hard to built too much of a story around an event that actually happened. If you start trying to focus on adding a 'traditional' narrative, you sometimes have to forgo telling things as they happened. The 'story' has already happened. The writers couldn't really tell it any differently. As with many war films, events have had to be 'condensed' in order to fit with the narrative they give it.'The Battle of Britain' may have the odd narrative flaw or character that isn't as developed as the audience feel s they should have been, but any film like this isn't supposed to be 'character-driven.' It's about a period of time where hundreds of innocent people were dying daily (and that's not even counting the airmen who were doing their best to defend the civilian population).When the aerial dogfights come, they're pretty spectacular. The film-makers restored many vintage planes and brought them back up to be air-worthy. Just because there aren't any computer-generated effects here, doesn't mean that the special effects aren't impressive.If you're looking for a story driven film, you may want to try somewhere else. If you want a totally historically-accurate depiction of the era, then read a history book. However, if you're happy with a film which generally gives you an idea just how scary it was to fight (and often) die in the air defending your country, try this. Those who fell don't deserve to be forgotten, however they're remembered.

bjrip There not much bad that can be said of all technical aspects involved in making such a film. The props ,costumes ,special effects ,The Planes and the combined lot take center stage in this brilliant UK produced spectacle!! The acting was well done there's zero Poorly spoken lines. Personally this movie was viewed by me twice it seems to follow historical correctness on a whole . I don't know how true all the various personal stories that weave there way throughout the entire movie are . However they are done tastefully and in Actual real life they are plausible . At the end of the movie when the credits are shown on screen the producers added statistics .Very Solemn moment. I don't know how your movie viewing goes , Thats in your hands . Personally I most always view credits from beginning to end .My movie experience becomes more fulfilling .

Tony Bush One of the best British war movies ever made, for my money. Just check out the cast list, which includes: Michael Caine, Trevor Howard, Christopher Plummer, Kenneth More, Laurence Olivier, Ralph Richardson, Robert Shaw, Susannah York, Curd Jurgens, Ian McShane, Edward Fox and so on. Gorgeous cinematography by Freddie Young, gripping aerial sequences using real aircraft (no CGI back then folks) that puts the audience right in the midst of the action in a realistic way that modern cinema today fails to effectively achieve - for all it's computerisation and 3D frippery.OK, so it's a bit iffy when it's on the ground, but when the dogfighting cranks into gear it's a high octane spectacle and a great historical reminder of the skill, bravery and sacrifices made by a breed of people the like of which we will never see again.